ESTRO 35 Abstract book

ESTRO 35 2016 S47 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________

only small nodules of carcinoma that could have remained totally localized (latent) during the entire life of the patient, therefore they could have been treated with watchful waiting. It is clear that all of this supposition is a speculative exercise and only comes from indirect suppositions of the probable biology of a carcinoma node by its pathological characteristics. This fact explains that there are diverse definitions of IPCa in the radical prostatectomy specimens, although all coincide in requiring a small volume of tumor (< 5cc, although there is an author that accepts < 1cc), absence of aggressive Gleason patterns (no 4 or 5 patterns or Gleason score <7) and the majority also require, for a tumor to be accepted as indolent, to be a confined organ tumour with negative margins. In accordance with these criteria, the prevalence of IPCa varies between 2.3% and 31%, with an average of 18.3%. However, this uniformity of criteria is not the same at the time of determining the pre-operative model to predict IPCa, possibly because all the studies that try to correlate the extension of the prostate cancer in the biopsy with the volume in the prostatectomy specimen show that this correlation is very weak; and therefore, although all the needle biopsy criteria for defining an IPCa require the absence of an aggressive Gleason pattern (pattern 4 and 5 or Gleason score ≤ 7) would vary as regards the extension of the tumor in the cores (< 3 core with no core >50% of the surface, only one positive core < 3mm, 1% of all the cores, no core > 10% of the surface) and the inclusion between the criteria of the PSAD (PSA density). With all this variability the presumption of a possible IPCa in the radical prostatectomy specimen of the different authors has a sensitivity of 23% to 83.9% (average 53.2%) and a specificity of 61.9% to 99% (average 89.1%). Maybe it will help us to better identification of very low aggressive P.Ca patients the recent redefinition of Gleason patterns and the proposed grouping of prognostic grades. A new International Society Urogenital Pathology revision in November 2014 defined the current criteria with a precise definition of Gleason pattern 3 as small glands with variation in size and shape infiltrating amongst non neoplasic glands and Gleason pattern 4 according four different aspects as all cribriform growth (some of them previously considered as pattern 3), fused glands, ill defined glands and glomeruloid glands. But with the intention to improve the correlation with the clinical parameters a new grading system was. This new system follows the accepted the new Gleason patterns grouping them in five prognostic groups: Group 1 (Gleason 3+3), Group 2 (Gleason 3+4), Group 3 (Gleason 4+3), Group 4 (Gleason 4+4) and Group 5 (score Gleason 9 and 10). According this new arrangement an excellent correlation with the risk of biochemical recurrence we can obtain in needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens. Prostate cancer is considered insignificant (IPCa) when its presence does not bring any vital risk. IPCa in the radical prostatectomy is a small (< 5cc,), No Gleason 4 or 5, organ confined, negative margins. The average prevalence is 18.3%. The pre-operative model to predict IPCa is difficult. In the IPCa identification can help the new ISUP Gleason revision, pattern 3 small glands with variation in size and shape and Gleason pattern 4 according four different aspects as all cribriform growth, fused, ill defined and glomeruloid glands. A new system was accepted grouping them in five prognostic groups: 1 (3+3), 2 (3+4), 3 (4+3), 4 (Gs8) 5 (Gs9,10), with excellent clinical correlation . SP-0105 The role of MRI in active surveillance G. Villeirs 1 Ghent University Hospital, Genitourinary Radiology, Ghent, Belgium 1 T2-weighted MRI (T2w) typically shows a prostate cancer as a low signal-intensity area among the high signal-intensity normal peripheral zone tissue background. In the transition zone, prostate cancer has an equally low signal-intensity, although contrasting less well with the surrounding heterogeneous signal-intensity of glandular and stromal hypertrophy. It has been shown that the observed signal intensity inversely correlates to some extent with the aggressiveness of the cancer (lowest signal intensities in

About one third of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) present with locoregional disease extension in either the mediastinum (T4) or the mediastinal lymph nodes (N2/3). Apart from a fraction in which resection after induction therapy is sometimes considered, selected patients with stage 3 are candidate for a so-called definitive radiochemotherapy, administered either sequentially or concomitantly. Despite staging with PET-CT scan and endosonographic mapping of mediastinal lymph nodes and notwithstanding a patient selection for this radical treatment, the outcome in stage 3 is nevertheless moderate with a median survival of 2 years [1]. Progression occurs after a median of 10 months and is due to local relapse or distant metastasis in 30 and 45% of cases, respectively. Any advance in the outcome in stage 3 NSCLC will hence depend on improvements in systemic therapy directed at distant metastasis. The past 10 years have seen important changes in the paradigm of treatment in selected patients with advanced NSCLC, in whom platinum-based doublet chemotherapy used to be the standard of care. The discovery of drugable genomic alterations has introduced precision medicine in oncology. Patients whose NSCLC harbour either an activating EGFR mutation, EML-ALK translocation or ROS1 amplification are now routinely treated with oral small molecule kinase inhibitors of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd generation instead of chemotherapy, with a significant improvement in outcome and a substantial impact on quality of life. Similar, although less pronounced effects have been observed when adding monoclonal antibodies directed at targets associated with angiogenesis or cell growth to the chemotherapy backbone. Unfortunately, the incorporation of these ‘targeted’ agents in current radiochemotherapy, either given concomitantly or as consolidation, was not successful with even detrimental results due to an increased toxicity and mortality. A lack of adequate patient selection based on the presence of the target biomarker may have contributed to these failures, as subgroup analyses suggest a benefit in target expressing patients. Trials are ongoing specifically addressing patients with stage 3 NSCLC and either an activating EGFR mutation or EML-ALK translocation. 2015 has seen the rapid implementation of immunotherapy in NSCLC treatment, with several monoclonal antibodies inhibiting checkpoint molecules showing superior outcome over 2nd line docetaxel. These agents will now advance in earlier stages and phase 3 trials with a consolidation strategy are ongoing. Controversial issues remain patient selection based on predictive biomarker expression, the combination of different checkpoint inhibitors and the risk of synergistic late pulmonary toxicity, when added to definitive thoracic radiotherapy. Although it is tempting to early implement promising new drugs in stage 3 treatment, caution should guide its sequencing within the radiochemotherapy backbone. Window of opportunity trials with induction treatment in biomarker selected patients will allow to explore the single agent activity and minimize the risk of additional toxicity. 1: Bradley JD et al. Lancet Oncol 2015; 16: 187–99 Symposium: Active surveillance for low risk prostate cancer: to treat or not to treat?

SP-0104 Does (very) low risk prostate cancer really exist? F. Algaba 1 Fundacio Puigvert, Barcelona, Spain 1

Prostate cancer could be considered as insignificant or indolent (IPCa) when its presence does not bring about any risk for the life of the patient. If we start with this idea it is easy to understand that this situation is very difficult to predict since it depends on many variables of each patient, among which the life expectancy of the patient is one of the most important; therefore, it would seem to be a more theoretical question than practical, if it were not because it reflects an emerged reality by finding that up to 31% of the prostate carcinomas detected by high PSA serum levels, through study of the prostatectomy specimen, there were